ANNE ELSPETH RECTOR: Context is crucial

Years ago, television news reported the horrific sexual-assault of a young woman at a party. Following an account of facts reporters interviewed another young woman who claimed she’d never be caught in such circumstances, effectively blaming the victim for where she was, despite many women attending the same party.

Journalists then offered critical context from a psychiatrist to help understand such callous remarks; how victim-blaming is a method of convincing oneself the crime could never happen to them, how primal fears can be so substantial people react to violence by blaming victims – in their minds, creating distance between themselves and such horrible fates.

No one’s odds of assault decrease this way.

We don’t often get such invaluable context in sexual-assault cases but rather than let her fearful remarks stand and encourage more victim-blaming, journalists revealed them as unreliable; as misguided attempts to convince herself she’s safer than she is, which doesn’t protect anyone from being assaulted but does harm original victims and all survivors watching. Including a mental-health professional’s context helped ensure hurtfulness wasn’t perpetuated.

This sprang to mind as I read of recent sexual-assault cases in Quinte. Whether child-luring charges against a sports-facility employee or videotape voyeurism charges against a former orthodontist, sexually-violent crimes often leave us confused about who to trust, when to trust, and how we could possibly know when we’re safe… or not.

We can’t always know; that’s the harsh truth. Voyeurs, child-pornographers, vicious sexual-assailants… these predators look like us, talk like us, work with us and socialize among us. They’re a part of society not apart from it. We should be less shocked to learn who they are, as if priests, doctors, commanders or other respected citizens couldn’t possibly be violent. No profession is exempt, no profession responsible. And where do we think perpetrators gravitate? Those with disturbing child-focussed proclivities will be specifically drawn to contact with children: schools; playgrounds; sports programs; medical offices; youth organizations…

So, when child pornography, voyeurism and sexual-assault charges were withdrawn by the Crown after the death of Dr. Anthony Garry Solomon Hastings County Crown Attorney Lee Burgess spent time with Luke Hendry explaining what happens when an accused dies before reaching court… a frustrating result to criminal proceedings. Yet, as I read I wondered what plausible defence for the recordings could ever have been made?

For as Hendry reported, “Const. Darrell Hatfield… as lead investigator… obtained a search warrant, seized 71 tapes… and began reviewing them. Given that Dr. Solomon was a solo practitioner at the time of the videos, that the individuals were all his patients, the filming often taking place in the dental chair, the presence of the videos with his files, and Dr. Solomon’s voice in the videos, there is little doubt that he was the individual who created the videos,” Burgess said.” And “the orthodontist made no further recordings of his male patients” most under 18. It’s a creepy reality many local families must grapple with, absent any public confrontation.

“We want the victims to know that they were believed,” Belleville Police Insp. Chris Barry said, “…this has been a huge violation of trust.” Added Burgess, “Certainly we place our trust in professionals around us, but it shouldn’t stop parents from being wary of situations… and while we certainly can trust most people, we should be careful not to have a blind trust in anybody simply because of their role or occupation.”

Every profession has every kind, including violent perpetrators; the provision of context in this case enormously helpful. As Burgess concluded, “We’ve made some positive inroads over the last number of years in the court in attitudes changing within the system, but we still have some ways to go in society.” Let’s continue.